TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 292
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Nevertheless, we have corrected it in this order. The names in the cause titles are as follows. Other details such as address, GSTIN etc. remain unchanged: * Cause Title as appearing on the portal: Vijay Devdattbhai Shah Versus Rutu Chemicals. * Cause Title as corrected and mentioned in this order: Assistant Commissioner of Central GST, Division-XI, Ankleshwar Vadodara-II. 3. No one appeared for the respondent. We have heard the learned Superintendent (AR) for the department. 4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a Show Cause Notice dated 26.12.2023 was issued to the respondent alleging short payment of tax of Rs. 2,21,556/- arrived at on a comparison of the tax liability appearing in GSTR-1 with the liability discharged through GSTR-3B. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand of the entire tax along with interest and imposed penalty of Rs. 22,155/-, against which the respondent approached the Appellate Authority. 4.1. After perusing the reconciliation sheet submitted by the taxpayer (the Respondent herein), the Appellate Authority found that there was short payment of Rs. 1,07,996/- for the tax period December 2018, and of Rs. 1,79,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....partment. It also provides that non-filing of such appeal or application shall not amount to acquiescence in the decision on the disputed issue by the department. Section 168 of the CGST Act, 2017 on the other hand, empowers the Board to issue orders, instructions or directions to the officers for the purpose of uniformity in implementation of the Act. It mandates that - "..... all such officers and all other persons employed in the implementation of this Act shall observe and follow such orders, instructions or directions." 7. Exercising powers under Sections 120 and 168, the Board has issued Circular No. 207/1/2024-GST, dated 26th June 2024. The relevant portion of the circular is reproduced below: Subject: Reduction of Government Litigation - fixing monetary limits for filing appeals or applications by the Department before GSTAT, High Courts and Supreme Court - reg. Reference is invited to the National Litigation Policy which was conceived with the aim of optimizing the utilization of judicial resources and expediting the resolution of pending cases. It underscores the importance of prudent litigation practices by establishing thresholds for filing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... fee (without involving any disputed tax amount), the aggregate of amount of interest, penalty and late fee shall be considered for applying the monetary limit for filing appeal. vi. Where the dispute pertains to erroneous refund, the amount of refund in dispute (including CGST, SGST/UTGST, IGST and Compensation Cess) shall be considered for deciding whether appeal needs to be filed or not. vii. Monetary limit shall be applied on the disputed amount of tax/interest/penalty/late fee, as the case may be, in respect of which appeal or application is contemplated to be filed in a case. viii. In a composite order which disposes more than one appeal/demand notice, the monetary limits shall be applicable on the total amount of tax/interest/penalty/late fee, as the case may be, and not on the amount involved in individual appeal or demand notice. 4. EXCLUSIONS Monetary limits specified above for filing appeal or application by the department before GSTAT or High Court and for filing Special Leave Petition or appeal before the Supreme Court shall be applicable in all cases, except in the following circumstances where the decision to file appeal s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e cases covered by the six prescribed exclusions. 9. The only ground raised in the appeal, in order to bring it within the exclusions, is the following (paragraph 4 of the Grounds of Appeal): "While the amount of penalty involved falls below the prescribed threshold for filing an appeal before the higher forum, the order is considered contrary to law and its legal validity is therefore being contested." 10. This ground does not bring the appeal within any of the six exclusions in para 4 of the Circular. It does not say that any provision of the Acts or the rules, or the order, notification, instruction, or circular has been held ultra vires. It does not say that the matter is related to valuation, classification, refunds or place of supply. Neither does it say that the case involves any strictures/ adverse comments or imposition of cost, nor that the Board finds it necessary to contest the case in the interest of justice or revenue. It simply says that the order is "contrary to law". However, mere disagreement with the order passed by the Appellate Authority would not bring a case within the exclusions of the circular. Not every order needs to be appealed merely beca....